- Joined
- Oct 21, 2015
- Messages
- 53,813
- Reaction score
- 10,864
- Location
- Kentucky
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
Don't descend into sarcasm and emotionalism. One thing I find that often separates conservatives from liberals is the former's ability to emphasize process over outcome. Leftists complain about unequal outcome no matter what the process that led to it. Right wingers are okay with unequal outcome as long as process is upheld. Part of upholding "process" involves regulating anti-competitive behavior and maintaining market freedom, which means the right and freedom of others to sell their goods or services in competition with other sellers. Done successfully, this keeps profit relatively low, because as soon as one seller is trying to skim too much off the price he's charging, another can step in and lure away his customers with more competitive pricing.
Conservatives value government's role in maintaining that competitive order, and the country has upheld competitiveness successfully on many occasions. But there are other cases in which government officials and the privately rich have colluded to skirt the competitive order entirely, exempt themselves from regulations that promote free markets, and further enrich themselves with behavior that should be illegal, but isn't, or it isn't enforced. Some engage in these tactics. Not all the rich in general. Some.
So therefore while it is not fair to generalize the rich as keeping people poor, some are worthy of that criticism by virtue of the unethical process by which they establish their success.
I don't disagree with that.